| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
Geckoman
Joined: 07 Jun 2007
|
 Posted: Wed Apr 23, 2008 7:51 pm Post subject: Korea Court Rules Woman Wasn�t Raped Because She Wore Jeans! |
 |
|
Korean Court Rules Woman Wasn�t Raped Because She Wore Jeans!
A Korean court has ruled that a woman could not of been raped because she worn jeans, reasoning that jeans are too difficult for anyone besides the wearer to take off. Thus, goes their thinking, the jeans had to of been taken off by the woman, and thus it was consensual.
This conclusion despite the fact that the woman was so physically damaged that she required 20 weeks of medical care. What type of consensual sex results in needing 20 weeks of medical care?!
TOTALLY OUTRAGEOUS! 
Read about the case below or go to http://www.koreatimes.co.kr/www/news/nation/2008/04/117_23019.html
| Quote: |
Rape Charge Called Into Question Over Jeans
April 23rd, 2008
By Bae Ji-sook
Staff Reporter
Is a woman whose jeans were found neatly folded by a bed likely to have been the victim of an attempted rape? A dispute is rising over a court ruling saying she could not have been since it is difficult for denims to be taken off by someone other than the wearer.
Outraged women's rights groups criticized the sentence as reflecting the prevalent chauvinism in society and that rape or sexual assault should never be taken lightly or glossed over.
The Seoul High Court Tuesday overturned a lower court's ruling to put a seven-year-jail term on a 35-year-old man on charges of attempted rape and assault that caused injuries requiring 20 weeks of medical care.
The incident took place in 2006 when the victim waited for a friend in a motel reception area while the friend checked-in with a man she'd met at a nightclub. After her friend turned the man down, he grabbed the other instead and allegedly tried to rape her. She then jumped from the sixth-floor-room window to escape his attempts to rape her.
In his defense the man claimed the woman was drunk, undressed herself and lured him in but ran away at the last minute.
The judge said in the ruling: ``Lots of things point to the accused attempting the rape. But a pair of skinny jeans and underwear found by the bedside neatly folded and the fact that such denims are hard for another person to take off beg clearer evidence to prove him guilty.'' He also said the woman having a medical record of depression should be taken into account.
According to the lower court ruling, the victim made coherent statements about her experience and left no grounds for doubt.
A judge at the court said on condition of anonymity that the higher court's ruling is difficult to accept. ``This is a typical sexual assault case. Regardless of past medical records, what comes first is the victim's coherent statement,'' he said.
Lee San of the Korea Sexual violence Relief Center said the ruling is quite irrational. ``Depression may make one dramatize their impression of an incident but it never distorts facts,'' she said. ``Also, skinny jeans may not be easy to take off, but that doesn't mean a man cannot take them off by force,'' she added.
The Online world was also abuzz over the ruling. A male internet user (ID: Kang Jeonggil) said the woman could easily have been forced to take off her jeans. ``In such a violent situation, she may have had to do it by herself. Jumping from such a height shows she was desperate and the court must have misread or ignored that,'' he said.
``Now women cannot wear jeans?'' an angry netizen (ID:antechinus) said.
[email protected]
Source: The Korea Times; April 23rd, 2008; http://www.koreatimes.co.kr/www/news/nation/2008/04/117_23019.html |
I remember when the exact same thing happened in Italy in 1999. An Italian court that year made the exact same ruling based on the exact same twisted logic. However, that was almost 10 years ago. And I also don�t think the woman in the Italian case was as physically damaged as the Korean women who required 20 weeks of medical care.
Also, in the Italian case, while the conviction was thrown out because the victim wore jeans, a new trial was ordered. I don�t know the result of the new trial. No new trial was ordered in the Korean case. The Korean ruling is the final say on the matter.
And, very importantly, there was great public outrage within Italy by the ruling. The Italian president came out publicly against the ruling and a group of female lawmakers went on a ''jeans strike,� wearing jeans to Parliament to protest the ruling. I doubt we will be seeing anything like that in Korea. Public outrage in Korea equivalent or more than in Italy? I don�t think so. I doubt it will even get much media coverage in Korea at all, at least not as much as a case like this should get.
To read about the Italian case go to:
�Ruling on Tight Jeans and Rape Sets Off Anger in Italy�
http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=9406E0D7133AF935A25751C0A96F958260&sec=&spon=&pagewanted=all |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Bryan
Joined: 29 Oct 2007
|
| Posted: Wed Apr 23, 2008 7:55 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: |
| This conclusion despite the fact that the woman was so physically damaged that she required 20 weeks of medical care. What type of consensual sex results in needing 20 weeks of medical care?! |
It seems like the woman has injuries from the jump out the window.
Last edited by Bryan on Wed Apr 23, 2008 7:56 pm; edited 1 time in total |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
ReeseDog
Joined: 05 Apr 2008
Location: Classified
|
| Posted: Wed Apr 23, 2008 7:55 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Could the woman have taken off her jeans and then have been raped? My understanding is that if it's consentual all the way up until you're ready to lay pipe, and then she says no, then anything beyond that is rape.
Blueballs sucks, but a rape beef is harder to beat. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
murcheson
Joined: 23 Feb 2008
|
| Posted: Wed Apr 23, 2008 8:38 pm Post subject: |
|
|
There's one for the quotable quotes thread
| Quote: |
Blueballs sucks, but a rape beef is harder to beat. |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Young FRANKenstein
Joined: 02 Oct 2006
Location: Castle Frankenstein (that's FRONKensteen)
|
| Posted: Wed Apr 23, 2008 9:37 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| ReeseDog wrote: |
| Could the woman have taken off her jeans and then have been raped? My understanding is that if it's consentual all the way up until you're ready to lay pipe, and then she says no, then anything beyond that is rape. |
I remember a case back home many many moons ago where a woman successfully got the attacker sentenced for rape DESPITE telling him to wear a condom. The argument she used was, he was going to rape her one way or another, there was no way to stop him as he already overpowered her once, so she told him to put the condom on so she wouldn't get pregnant from the rape. Judge bought it and dude went to prison.
Only the victom can take the jeans off? Please. All an attacker has to do is punch her in the face until she's out of it. Then he can take his time taking them off. What a moron. One of those who bought his way to the robes, I assume. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
aboxofchocolates
Joined: 21 Mar 2008
Location: on your mind
|
| Posted: Wed Apr 23, 2008 10:46 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| That plane I took passed through a time warp to the fifties. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
livinginkunsan
Joined: 02 Dec 2006
|
| Posted: Wed Apr 23, 2008 11:11 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Not knowing the specifics of this case (like I am sure everyone else here), one would have to know what "medical attention was needed" and an experts definition of how those injuries occurred. A 6th floor jump is definitely gonna end you in the Hospital. Makes me think there could be merit in the overturning of the decision. The big thing is.. we DONT know all the facts |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Young FRANKenstein
Joined: 02 Oct 2006
Location: Castle Frankenstein (that's FRONKensteen)
|
| Posted: Thu Apr 24, 2008 2:41 am Post subject: |
|
|
| livinginkunsan wrote: |
| we DONT know all the facts |
Regardless of what they are, a judge would have to be a dim bulb to think one would jump from the 6th floor without there being a damn good reason for it. The rapist (sorry, "alleged rapist") claims she changed her mind and took off. Fine. But THROUGH A 6th FLOOR WINDOW?? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
pomegranate_grenade
Joined: 14 Apr 2008
|
| Posted: Thu Apr 24, 2008 3:35 am Post subject: |
|
|
this is disgusting. have any of those morons LOOKED out a 6th story window recently???
i can't write anymore, i think i'm gonna puke. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
ajgeddes
Joined: 28 Apr 2004
Location: Yongsan
|
| Posted: Thu Apr 24, 2008 3:49 am Post subject: |
|
|
In my mind, the folding of the jeans and underwear seems like a cover-up. I mean, if you are going to a hotel to get freaky with someone, while drunk, who takes the time to neatly fold their pants AND UNDERWEAR? Seems more likely that she jumped and the guy did that to cover it up.
Anyways, the final ruling is what I have come to expect from Korea. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Typhoon
Joined: 29 May 2007
Location: Daejeon
|
| Posted: Thu Apr 24, 2008 4:00 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Is anyone really surprised by this? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
laogaiguk
Joined: 06 Dec 2005
Location: somewhere in Korea
|
| Posted: Thu Apr 24, 2008 4:02 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Typhoon wrote: |
| Is anyone really surprised by this? |
Yes, I was still actually surprised  |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
ryouga013
Joined: 14 Sep 2007
|
| Posted: Thu Apr 24, 2008 4:06 am Post subject: |
|
|
I'll try to post some of the book I'm reading later ("Culture Shock Korea") to show what kind of stuff is it, but while reading it it has lead me to believe that this kind of thing is nothing in Korea... I wonder where in Korea's history rape, except in the case of someone of power's daughter or wife, did rape even become a felony grade crime...
doesn't surprise me, but it still makes me sick... |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
daemyann
Joined: 09 Nov 2007
|
| Posted: Thu Apr 24, 2008 4:58 am Post subject: |
|
|
Does anyone else find it interesting that "what comes first" is stated to be "the victims coherent report"..?
Granted, that wasn't the court speaking, but I certainly hope it would in fact be corroborating evidence...
Anyway, as ridiculous a ruling as this looks to be, it's important to note whether or not there was actual physical evidence of the accusation.
If they could not distinguish injuries received from the fall and injuries received from the alleged sexual assault, and thus had no evidence of a crime taking place, I can understand the ruling (ignoring the ludicrous jeans comments).
Of course it's reasonable to assume that she jumped because she feared for her life, but without evidence to support that claim, he's innocent in the eyes of the law.
Period. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
kermo
Joined: 01 Sep 2004
Location: Eating eggs, with a comb, out of a shoe.
|
| Posted: Thu Apr 24, 2008 5:01 am Post subject: |
|
|
| ReeseDog wrote: |
Could the woman have taken off her jeans and then have been raped? My understanding is that if it's consentual all the way up until you're ready to lay pipe, and then she says no, then anything beyond that is rape.
|
That's an unusually enlightened view. A lot of people cannot conceive of rape unless it is accompanied by screaming, violent battery and a menacing, mustachioed stranger with a big knife. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Usergroups
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
